Upload
Login or register
Highest Rated Newest
auto-refresh every 1 2 3 5 seconds
Latest users (2): akkere, figatron, anonymous(4).
Anonymous comments allowed.
#108259 - unforgivensoul
Reply +2
(02/28/2016) [-]
When the vote comes down to Hillary vs Trump. People will have no excuse, it will be a battle solely of establishment vs anti-establishment and every leftist that votes for Hillary is voting for the current establishment and will have absolutely no right to complain about the way things are run, especially the ones that used to like Bernie.

You will fully cement yourself as someone who doesn't give a single shit about voting to change the country if you vote for Hillary. That goes out there to all the Bernie retards who claim to be so anti-establishment. If you are truly anti-establishment you'll vote Trump solely for that reason.
#108288 to #108259 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
The rich guy that filed publicly for bankruptcy is not "anti-establishment".
#108303 to #108288 - unforgivensoul
Reply -1
(02/29/2016) [-]
That's a pretty poor argument. None of those 2 factors eliminate the second for me.
#108270 to #108259 - canyou
Reply +8
(02/28/2016) [-]
Trump isn't as anti establishment as everyone gives him credit for.
#108275 to #108270 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
He's anti-US Constitution and free trade.
#108279 to #108275 - anon
Reply +2
(02/29/2016) [-]
AND ANTI-FAT BEN'S POOP D:
#108265 to #108259 - akkere ONLINE
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
After seeing how much Trump supports the NSA and the PATRIOT Act, I'm not so sure if he's "truly anti-establishment" anymore. There isn't any politician in the race that has a solid vote-against the NSA agenda (at least not one that doesn't come with a contradicting caveat), but Trump's one of the few that's completely voiced absolute support to the extent of wanting to have Snowden dead and buried. This is a policy that both of the major parties have correlated to, and if Trump goes in head-first with the intent to continue that policy, we might see even more legislative that detract away from the Constitution in the name of the "war on terror".
Trump is many things, but "anti-establishment" doesn't seem to be one of them anymore.
#108267 to #108265 - jettom
Reply -1
(02/28/2016) [-]
This is a common issue.
Trump is anti-Government, or anti-Washington. As in, he wants the states to have more power, not have all the power be in Washington. He also wants some certain things I.E National Security to be the job of Washington.
#108269 to #108267 - akkere ONLINE
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
Donald Trump Goes After Grandstander NSA Leaker Edward Snowden On Fox
Trump sides with Rubio splits w Cruz over NSA metadata collection
That would be a valid viewpoint, if it weren't for the glaring contradiction of allowing Washington to actively break the Constitution in the name of national security.
That's giving Washington a lot of power that can easily push the balance to giving the federal leeway over the states. Considering the fact that he's voiced all kinds of support to the PATRIOT Act with nothing considered to rein in the federal government and the NSA on the warrant-less collection of metadata on citizens who wouldn't have even done anything to warrant such intrusions. To make matters worse, he doesn't voice anything to so much as acknowledge the collections on the citizens, just simply reiterates "I err on the side of security" over and over, thinking the surveillance is solely targeted on terrorists and foreign groups.

If you're anti-Washington but support National Security, you want to revise the PATRIOT Act, or even crush it and reform it to something more focused; not recklessly give it the big red approval stamp with a statement as hamfisted as "I err on the side of security" and completely ignore all damages to the very foundations of the country.
#108283 to #108269 - anon
Reply -1
(02/29/2016) [-]
Just wanted to declare that I no longer support the NSA and the PATRIOT-act tier laws.
#108264 to #108259 - jettom
Reply -1
(02/28/2016) [-]
The democratic election proves more than anything that Affirmative Action is doing its job of educating minorities.
Thanks, Obama!
#108262 to #108259 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I can see it now,

"I made America great again, we all did, and now we have a chance to share our greatness throughout the solar system. Mars used to have water, it may have used to have life, it used to be a great planet. We're gonna go to Mars, I swear we will, we'll make it happen, I have friends at NASA, they're great people, the best people and they do great things. I have tremendous respect for them. I'm gonna get us to Mars, and we're gonna make Mars great again."
#108281 to #108262 - asotil
Reply -1
(02/29/2016) [-]
"I have a great relationship with the Yautja, they love me there I have many of them employed, we're great friends"
#108276 to #108262 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(02/28/2016) [-]
If he had a speech writer you could get that job.
#108258 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
Well now I'm unsure about my vote
#108286 to #108258 - thereasonableperso
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
"Welcome to the White House, motherfuckeeer!"
#108277 to #108258 - canyou
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Lol
#108254 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
How Donald Trump Answers A Question

This is pretty interesting
#108282 to #108254 - theism
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Is it just me or is the flow of how he speaks bizarre?
#108341 to #108282 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
It's quite odd.
#108263 to #108254 - jettom
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Okay. I looked at his words, I still agree with them.
Now what?
#108278 to #108263 - canyou
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I feel like Charisma On Command's trump videos are more interesting.
#108261 to #108254 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Good and interesting video at its core, not a great introduction or ending. It's pretty obvious he finds trump to be a stupid racist and that's influencing his conclusions.
#108274 to #108261 - redandgreen
Reply -2
(02/28/2016) [-]

While I don't have a very high opinion of Trump either, I agree, it would have been a better video if he'd focused on the language analysis which was very interesting.

You may not agree but I think Trump's language will be a problem for him and the US if he ends up winning the Presidency.
#108260 to #108254 - thumbfortrump
Reply +2
(02/28/2016) [-]
Yeah, he totally manipulates those of lesser intelligence.

Luckily, you and the guy in the video are both enlightened enough to resist his manipulative rhetoric.

And how I love his "Trump wants to ban all muslims from entering the US" introduction, even though it's been stated repeatedly that he only wants to ban foreign muslims from entering.

mfw this biased communist shitstain
#108289 to #108260 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Even then, the constitutionality of such a law is highly disputable. Nowhere in the First Amendment did it say it only applied to citizens, just to its territory, which technically means that it would only be constitutional for the US to endorse similar travel bans for another country.
#108317 to #108289 - thumbfortrump
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
It is perfectly constitutional, as the constitution applies only to US territory.

If you ban people from entering, they will never be under the Constitution's jurisdiction.
And if they managed to enter the country with the ban in place, they would have entered the country illegally, which means deporting them would be perfectly legal.
#108318 to #108317 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
The First Amendment quite clearly states that laws prohibiting the free exercise of a religion are not in any way allowed, regardless of the reason.

Islam is just gun control for conservatives.
#108319 to #108318 - thumbfortrump
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Did you not read what I wrote?
#108320 to #108319 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
I did, and to establish such a ban, a law needs to be passed that prevents the practice of Islam in the United States in some fashion. Thus, First Amendment violations.

It might not make sense from a pragmatic perspective, but the law is the law.
#108321 to #108320 - thumbfortrump
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Not at all.
It is simply a law that prohibits certain people from entering the country.
It does not in any way limit what peoplealready in the country are allowed to believe.

I've talked this over with many of my fellow law students, including my former associate professor in constitutional theory, and they all agree that it's possible to adopt such a law.
The problem occurs when it applies to American citizens, or when it does not ban foreigners from entering, but prohibits them from practicing their religion in the country.
#108323 to #108321 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
"I've talked this over with many of my fellow law students, including my former associate professor in constitutional theory, and they all agree that it's possible to adopt such a law."

With how liberal an interpretation?
#108324 to #108323 - thumbfortrump
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Interpreted to the extent of the legal subject being a foreigner. And to answer your comment below, it is still not unconstitutional.
#108325 to #108324 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
After a quick search, the main argument for its constitutionality seems to be plenary power. Apparently it's a fuzzy line where the actual authority lies on the matter when most plenary immunity relates to things not in the Bill of Rights, like race, which was never illegal to mandate by.
#108322 to #108321 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
The intent of a law does not determine its legality. The First Amendment does not care why or when a law is being passed, because old parchment paper is not alive and sapient. Every word and character in its text has concrete ramifications.

As soon as the word "Islam" appears in the law, it is unconstitutional.
#108290 to #108289 - youregaylol
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Not really, it's actually common legal knowledge that the president can ban whoever he wants from the country as long as they're not citizens.

"Whenever the president finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he deems necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens,”- Immigration and Nationality Act

If we interpreted all law exactly as the constitution mandated it with no accounting for specific bills there would be no gun control at all in the US.
#108316 to #108290 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Except this law is possible expressly because its lack of conflict with the First Amendment.
#108273 to #108260 - redandgreen
Reply -2
(02/28/2016) [-]
Why do you think he's communist?

You're right, he's wrong when he says that Trump said he wanted to ban all Muslims from entering.

What I think he's right about is that Trump talks like a salesman and not a politician. I think that'll be a problem for him if he wins.
#108255 to #108254 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
People vote for Trump because of what he stands for and his ideas. No one is going to care about videos like these which I saw posted here a month ago anyways
#108272 to #108255 - redandgreen
Reply -2
(02/28/2016) [-]
I posted it because I thought he made an interesting point as to how Trump's language differs from that of other politicians.

I didn't realise it was posted before.
#108243 - thumbfortrump
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
You need to login to view this link

Damn evil Zionist banking CIA coalition bombing ISIS, even though we ALL know that ISIS is created and funded by evil Zionist banking CIA USA coalition NWO!!1 THEY CAN'T FOOL ME.
If it wasn't for the evil NWO USA, there would be peace in the world, especially the Middle east. All violence IS USAs FAULT!2

I could post evidence, but I will leave it to you sheeple to find it yourself.
If you disagree you're a brainwashed normie, and not a red-pilled, philosophical superior being like myself.
#108296 to #108243 - anon
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
STUPID JEWS!!!
#108247 to #108243 - anon
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
Trick question : Why didn't the US start bombing oil fields/routes before Russia started doing it in Syria?

#108249 to #108247 - thumbfortrump
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
BTFO
T
F
O
#108248 to #108247 - thumbfortrump
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
abcnews.go.com/International/us-led-planes-strike-isis-oil-facilities-syria/story?id=25739334

Wtf are you talking about. Coalition started bombing in September 2014.
Oil facilities were some of the first things targeted.

This is exactly the kind of shilling that is ruining this board.
#108238 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I thought this was really sad

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-35681240

I guess there'll be more details soon
#108244 to #108238 - lotengo
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Tis indeed sad, tho i dont fully understan what Canada has to do with this.
#108251 to #108244 - redandgreen
Reply -2
(02/28/2016) [-]
It's just how the BBC splits world news geographically. US and Canada get put together.
#108227 - pebar
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
#108253 to #108227 - canyou
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
I'll just wait for his next podcast. I wanna hear his thoughts on navada and South Carolina too.
#108188 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
What does this board think of me? Don't get me wrong, I'm not the kind of person who'll suck dick to feel popular. I'm just curious what kind of impression my politics leaves on people.
#108246 to #108188 - Elk
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I don't recognize you.
#108239 to #108188 - redandgreen
Reply -2
(02/28/2016) [-]
You're probably nice in person. Hopefully you'll realise Nazism isn't a good option at some point.
#108237 to #108188 - youregaylol
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Don't listen to them, you're alright
#108236 to #108188 - jewishcommunazi
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
I feel like when you first started becoming a nat soc was because it was "cool". Apart from that, I think you're ok.
#108235 to #108188 - valeriya
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I can't help but imagine you as the kid that eats glue, who will do stupid things when told to do them by their peers.
#108408 to #108235 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Update me: how is shit wherever you live? last I remember you were in Ukraine doing charity work or something?
#108421 to #108408 - valeriya
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Yeah physically became less able to do that, plus things died down a bit, they're not fixed but they're reigned in to a point, last I've heard from associates things are "better". I'm living in the UK right now, sitting around doing fuck all until April
#108426 to #108421 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
What happens in April? Also what do you plan to do with your degree (in what?) from UK?
#108431 to #108426 - valeriya
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Due date in April Got married last year , knees are shit because military service, got one replaced last year. I finished my time as a junior doctor last year, and I work in the NHS usually. I've done little but sit around and play games the last 3 months
#108440 to #108431 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Livin the dream sounds like. How does it feel to be more alpha than half the guys in the UK.
#108508 to #108440 - valeriya
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Should clarify I work in the cesspit of the NHS Accident and Emergency , ranges from being very fulfilling to being absolutely soul crushing.
#108522 to #108508 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
I'm a little interested on the "soul crushing" part.
#108560 to #108522 - valeriya
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Where to begin,from kids being incredibly ill due to their parents not vaccinating only had one death so far, to people injuring themselves doing some stupid things, at the same time it's something to laugh about, worst thing I've ever done is spent about 3 hours searching for a mental health ward with free space. (might not seem like long, but really this process is walking on hot coals and glass since I've got to fight off a manager whilst engaging with a patient, whilst making phone calls). I have spent a little too much time throwing rocks in the form of angry letters to managers and to my mp, because a lot of it is insufficient staff.
#108599 to #108560 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Think you would have a better time if health care was privatized?
#108600 to #108599 - valeriya
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Makes no difference really, the main issue with this field, is it's lucrative at the high end the training and what not is unpleasant to say the least. You've got to basically be prepared to throw your social life out the window, take shitty pay for about 6 years whilst having to pay to stay registered and stay alive in general, get a shit tonne of debt, get a shit tonne of stress in your life in general because there is a lot of responsibility, pass a metric shit tonne of exams, pay for insurance. And then you can start making decent money. Just going to say that applies for all doctors and medical staff. Accident and Emergency I'd say double it. So it's not a popular route to go into.
#108611 to #108600 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/02/2016) [-]
How much does your final career pay in UK? I know that American doctors are payed far more than in Canada.
#108662 to #108611 - valeriya
Reply 0
(03/02/2016) [-]
Depends on what you want to do really, if you want to be a consultant depends on specialty, also bare in mind that pay varies but often between around £70,000 to £110,000 per year Where a specialty doctor is basically the exact same thing but doesn't want as much responsibilty and doesn't perform as much management function, starts at around £40,000 per year, when you consider that the average debt for a doctor is around £80,000 to around £70,000 per year and you're more involved in patient care. Baring in mind you can work not for the NHS, and earn a lot more, although typically you supplement yourself with things
#108234 to #108188 - canyou
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I don't particularly like that profile picture.
#108230 to #108188 - marinepenguin
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
You seem like a fairly reasonable person with a Nazi fetish.
#108224 to #108188 - pebar
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
I think you're a little too obsessed with nat socialism
it seems like it's a fetish for you
#108211 to #108188 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
oh I almost forgot, you're a backstabbing fuck.
#108213 to #108211 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
The fact that you're still ass-ravaged by that speaks volumes.
#108216 to #108213 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Principled people never forget backstabs. I expect the same from you.
#108217 to #108216 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
It's a video game. I suppose if I killed you in Minecraft you'd start a petition to have me banned?
#108225 to #108217 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Principle man, you backstabbed me. I'll forgive you though. Work on what I wrote below.
#108250 to #108225 - Zaxplab
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
>>#108217, I feel like there's a hilarious story behind this. Would the two of you like to explain it?
#108257 to #108250 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Not really, its the past.
#108209 to #108188 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
You've obviously evolved immensely in the past 2 years because of the internet, I can barely remember you as a non-nazi. The only problem I have with the change is that you may have swung too far to the right, like going literally full nat soc mode (unironically) is too far. You might want to re-evaluate positions from an unbiased perspective like market economics which I assume you greatly lack in knowledge. I made the same mistake as you of going too far to the right too quickly, and then having to realize I was being driven partially by emotion and bitter hate. I don't know if its the same for you, but that's how I felt and I think I'm changing from that.

I wish we could remove sub-humans from society too, but we won't get that anytime soon at all so you may as well drop any of those opinions and not focus on them. Don't hypothesize about how a nazi revolution will go, it won't happen in your lifetime. I know I'm assuming a lot, but I'm just basing this off my own experience.

Also leave Canada with me, got dat interview for permanent residence for U.S.A coming up soon.
#108252 to #108209 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(02/28/2016) [-]
Evolved into a Nazi.....

SMH
#108256 to #108252 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I'm not a nazi though, I'm not sure why you replied to me.
#108271 to #108256 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(02/28/2016) [-]
"You've obviously evolved immensely in the past 2 years because of the internet, I can barely remember you as a non-Nazi"
#108335 to #108271 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
hahahaha I like how you thumbed me down even though you made the mistake of replying to me
#108398 to #108335 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(02/29/2016) [-]
I thumbed you down because you made such a stupid statement. I intended to reply to you because you had made such a stupid statement.
#108399 to #108398 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
"you made such a stupid statement" Which statement exactly?
#108401 to #108399 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(02/29/2016) [-]
"You've obviously evolved immensely in the past 2 years because of the internet, I can barely remember you as a non-Nazi"
#108402 to #108401 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
How is that a stupid statement? If you don't believe me just ask him, he turned into a nazi like 2 years ago. How do you deny facts?
#108404 to #108402 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(02/29/2016) [-]
Becoming a Nazi is in no way an evolution. Devolution, maybe.
#108405 to #108404 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Ok but how is that a stupid statement? Like explain how exactly what I said is stupid if its true.

"The Sun's light takes 8 minutes to reach the Earth"

8 MINUTES FFS OMG
#108407 to #108405 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(02/29/2016) [-]
"evolve
/ɪˈvɒlv/
verb
verb: evolve; 3rd person present: evolves; past tense: evolved; past participle: evolved; gerund or present participle: evolving

1.

develop gradually.
"the company has evolved into a major chemical manufacturer"


synonyms: develop, progress, make progress, advance, move forward, make headway, mature, grow, open out, unfold, unroll, expand, enlarge, spread, extend"


Becoming a Nazi is not a part of someone's evolution, it's regression.
#108409 to #108407 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
So literally the only reason you disliked what I said is because you preferred me to use a synonym for evolution because you don't like the way evolving sounds in reference to someone becoming a nazi, that is literally the reason?

FYI: Developing gradually is changing, the man changed into a nazi. His political opinions evolved over time, just because you don't like the fact that he became a nazi doesn't mean its not what happened. Silly language-policing dyke.
#108411 to #108409 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(03/01/2016) [-]
I'm not a fucking lesbian.

It'd be correct to say he devolved into a Nazi.
#108414 to #108411 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
That's an opinion, he changed so using evolving/devolving is just a nuance term. Only someone on their period like you would care about such a slight difference.

By the way, does the Irish government subsidize tampons?
#108416 to #108414 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
You complain about me but you're the one who starts being insulting.

I did actually say something unpleasant before but I deleted it because I was trying to actually discuss stuff with you.
#108419 to #108416 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
I insult people that I don't respect. I don't respect you not only because of the stupid opinions you hold (which that of a typical uneducated leftist), but mainly because of the way you argue (extremely poorly) where in you ignore my arguments, use fallacious tactics and plain old don't even respond. If this was fixed I would stop insulting you, all I ask is for a standard of arguing which you always ignore. That's why you happen to be literally the only person I dislike on this board, the only one.
#108425 to #108419 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Bullshit.

You ignore other's arguments and any evidence which you don't like.

You insult people purely because you disagree with them.
#108438 to #108425 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
/politics/108436

You seem to keep ignoring what I'm saying, its like you cant process info. I dislike you so I thumb down all your comments regardless. I've already said this before.

>I've seen you insult other people on here and you thumbed me down for this:
A little bit sure, but not nearly as much as you because you are the only one I dislike, cunty dyke.
#108429 to #108425 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
>You insult people purely because you disagree with them.

See this is my exact point, you ignored completely. And I want to put this on the record, completely my argument. I had already explained to you why, and instead of trying to debunk what I wrote you just ignored it. This is why I hate you, do you understand now?
#108436 to #108429 - redandgreen
+1
(03/01/2016) [-]
I've seen you insult other people on here and you thumbed me down for this:

/politics/108238#108238

and for explaining to lotengo why it said Canada?

Sure, you thumb me down and insult me because of the argument in my posts...... Like fuck you do.
#108342 to #108335 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(02/29/2016) [-]
Also, you thumb me down regardless of what I post or who it's in response to, so whatever.
#108400 to #108342 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
True, its because every time you post its some kind of substance-less bullshit baiting that only trolls do. If you actually posted good stuff I would stop.
#108403 to #108400 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(02/29/2016) [-]
You thumb me down because you disagree with me. Often you don't even argue any point, you just down vote.
#108406 to #108403 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
I've said this before many times, I try arguing with you but you never respond. You are the one that never actually argues.

I don't thumb you down because I disagree with you, if that was true I'd be thumbing down a lot of people, if not most posts. I thumb you down because I simply don't like you or the way you behave here. It's that simple.
#108410 to #108406 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(03/01/2016) [-]
I respond to you. You may be able to tell now you'll actually get notifications.

You say I don't argue when what you actually mean is that you disagree.

I don't like the way you behave here either. For example, you red thumbed my response to feely. Why? It's not offensive. It's certainly far less offensive than all the 'leftist' stuff. Far, far less offensive than you calling me an 'Irish cunt' which you did before.
#108412 to #108410 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
I said its because I don't like you. That's why I do it, I don't agree with user X but I don't thumb him down. I don't like you, so I actively thumb you down regardless.

>I respond to you. You may be able to tell now you'll actually get notifications.
Highest degree of BS since I always went back to check comments I wrote when I was anon. That or maybe it literally took you a week to respond and I had failed on caring at that point.
#108413 to #108412 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(03/01/2016) [-]
I responded to everything I got a notification for and actually asked you to point me to the things you said I missed.

Go fuck yourself you arrogant bastard.
#108415 to #108413 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
/politics/107132
/politics/107071
/politics/106911
/politics/107588

All of this is literally on one page, get rekked.
#108418 to #108415 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(03/01/2016) [-]
Actually, I wasn't even the only one who had!
#108417 to #108415 - redandgreen
Reply -1
(03/01/2016) [-]
About the fucking oil thing? I had ALREADY posted evidence that it had been for oil. Why the fuck should I keep producing evidence for it?
#108420 to #108417 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
I don't intend to revisit dozens of old content with you.
#108427 to #108420 - redandgreen
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Whatever.
#108340 to #108335 - redandgreen
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#108284 to #108271 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
oh so you were referring to him.
#108205 to #108188 - asotil
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Better than me most likely
#108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
Gonna post some highlights as I find them
#108226 to #108184 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
God bless you for the funny, much appreciated.
#108215 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
Bernie Sanders Is Beating EVERYONE Last one, apologies for flooding the board but I figured we could all use some laughs Saturday night

Cancer warning, video is from The Young Turks
#108212 to #108184 - anon
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
If he's gonna lose why are you damage controlling this hard?
#108214 to #108212 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
Damage control would be if I said "His loss is actually a win, take that Shillary"

Instead I'm posting the highlights from r/politics about people who have completely ruined their and their families lives falling for his donation scheme and then threatened to kill themselves

I don't think you know what damage control is, anon. This is damage expansion if anything
#108203 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
#108202 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +2
(02/28/2016) [-]
#108201 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
#108200 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
#108245 to #108200 - anon
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I love when people donate large sums of money to the Sanders campaign and throw a shit fit when he loses the state, even with how obvious it is that the Democratic primaries are rigged in favor of Hillary. She has the money, she has the superdelegates, how do these people possibly think their donations are going to make a difference? They're practically just shoveling their money into a fire.
#108199 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
This is from Reddit, grabbed it before mods deleted it
#108198 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
MAGA
#108468 to #108198 - anon
Reply 0
(03/01/2016) [-]
Natural selection in action.
#108231 to #108198 - lotengo
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Ignore the tabs, its not my screenshot.
They really are on suicide watch here.
#108196 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
BAMBOO
A
M
B
O
O
#108195 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
>TFW you realize Sanders is the perfect Jew
>TFW you realize he never gave a fuck about being president
>TFW you realize his entire plan was to trick naive idiot college kids into giving him all of their money while saying money isn't everything

Bernie is the God of the Fiddle
#108229 to #108195 - anon
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Campaign funds can't be used to personally enrich yourself, you mongoloid.
#108192 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
Literally on suicide watch
#108193 to #108192 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
OY VEY
#108190 to #108184 - asotil
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
#108187 to #108184 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Aren't these supposed to be our moral superiors on the left who are all about equality?
#108204 to #108187 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
It's pretty obvious /pol/ trolling, on that particular post they're bringing up cuckolding. Which they don't yet seem to realize is a very bizarre obsession endemic to them. www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/47zo37/terminal_cancer_patient_here_i_was_excited_for/

I was already linked this one before by a very hardline stormfront type, they're doing little to hide it.

#108228 to #108204 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Most of them posts seem to be legit, obviously the "nigger"/"cuck" ones aren't.
#108206 to #108204 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Aw shucks.
#108208 to #108206 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Don't be too disappointed. Do you really want more "I hate those niggers so much that my life is centered around it" in right wing politics?
#108210 to #108208 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Good point.
#108189 to #108187 - asotil
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Ye
#108194 to #108189 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
And in his last moments, he realized that conservatism was the right way to go and that democrats are poison. That's hilarious to me. minus the racism thing
#108185 to #108184 - asotil
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
#108266 to #108185 - jettom
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Hey man I found these screencaps fucking hilarious. You mind if I repost them as a compilation as content?
#108280 to #108266 - asotil
Reply 0
(02/29/2016) [-]
Yee
#108180 - asotil
Reply +2
(02/28/2016) [-]
>80%

BERNOUTS ON SUICIDE WATCH
ITS FUCKING OVER
COMMUNISM FAILS AGAIN
#108207 to #108180 - anon
Reply +2
(02/28/2016) [-]
#108173 - theism
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Should policy be made that result in a less than optimal economic impact but an optimal social impact?
#108177 to #108173 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Both one in the same.
#108175 to #108173 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
How about the government lay off the "economic impact" in general. It usually fucks it up anyhow.
#108161 - anon
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
#108160 - nigalthornberry
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Okay so less than 1% of SC votes are in and CNN is already claiming Hillary won
#108191 to #108160 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
That's pretty standard at this point.
#108158 - unforgivensoul
Reply +3
(02/27/2016) [-]
"Trump is a racist!"

>WINS HISPANIC VOTE IN NEVADA

N
E
V
A
D
A
#108141 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
www.usnews.com/news/articles/2016-02-26/trump-will-become-president-statistical-model-says

Be afraid, be very afraid. Apparently this statistical model has only been incorrect once on over a hundred years. It puts Trump at a 96% chance at winning against Hillary, and 99% against Bernie. 61% chance of winning against the democrats if it's any other republican candidate.
#108144 to #108141 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Wasn't there another source that was "never wrong", and predicted Bernie becoming president?

I don't know what fantastical and infallible deity of statistics and math to worship anymore.
#108146 to #108144 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Never seen it.

And Bernie Sanders plan also has the support of like 120 supposed world class economists. So I'd take anything the media puts out on Bernie with a grain of salt. Because those economists are either working through a different reality I am, or they just want to support him for whatever reason.
#108162 to #108146 - kanadetenshi
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
fyi what Bernie Sanders proposes is not a nordic model.
#108167 to #108162 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I don't think I ever said he wants to emulate that, was I implying it or something?

And he does want us to become more like Europe in general though.
#108157 to #108146 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Nordic model economics are hardly a controversial idea, they aren't the Third Way spend-because-we-can policy of Democrats or, god forbid, supply side.
#108166 to #108157 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
The Nordic model has done well in a lot of ways for those nations, but whether they'd scale up to work for a nation the size and population of the US has yet to be seen. The entire population of all the Nordic countries is smaller than many individual US states.

Plus they essentially don't pay for defense, as like most European nations, they let the US act as their defense after the fall of the USSR, until recently, as most European nations have begun to increase spending.
#108168 to #108166 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
One could make the "won't scale" argument about pretty much any non-Keynesian economic policy. The US also spends extremely more on defense even compared to its population.

We already spend more on safety nets than we need to. Replacing them entirely without reducing benefits would provide more than enough of a spending reduction.
#108172 to #108168 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
You misunderstood my point on defense. The Nordic countries, along with the rest of Europe, haven't had to spend as much on defense because they're protected by the very strong US military. That obviously frees up a lot of currency to spend on other things.

And the US military budget isn't extreme in any fashion in my opinion. Yes, we spend the most by far in terms of sheer amount. But in terms of GDP we're not even close to the top. We spent 3.5% of our GDP on defense on 2014, while Saudi Arabia spend 10.8%, Israel 5.2%, and Russia 4.5%, and those are just larger powers. A couple nations spend even more than Saudi Arabia.

data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS

The only complaint on military spending that I have,is how inefficient we spend it. Put trillions into an F-35 project that is destined to be an ineffective plane, along with many other things projects.
#108176 to #108172 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I would absolutely argue that these nations that pour more into military spending don't give nearly enough of a shit about their own citizens. Russia is also becoming quite fond of foreign imperialism, despite their wannabe monarch criticizing the US for the same thing, while Saudi Arabia openly funds terrorism while somehow being treated as a Western ally because they have oil, so it's clear they want to be ready for when that bargaining chip runs dry. We also aren't located right next to a hostile enemy like Israel is.

It doesn't really matter for the US though in terms of affording safety nets, because the current system is basically supposed to be awful, both sabotaged by butthurt post-Reagan conservatives and Democrats trying to regain the white vote by playing to the perception that welfare = blacks and Mexicans.
#108178 to #108176 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Yes, it's almost like every nation that spends more on their military has a reason to do so, the US does as well. After the USSR fell, it left a massive power vacuum that the US has tried to fill, we've essentially tried to become a world peacekeeping force, establishing bases all around the world, advising other nations in military tactics, teaching them skills, and providing aid where its needed. All that costs money, and in my mind we can easily afford it if we spend more efficiently. In areas where we step back, and don't help, a power vacuum occurs and we see other forces take our place. We saw it in Vietnam, we saw it in Iraq, and now we're beginning to see it in Afghanistan. What's bankrupting us isn't our military, which is only 18% of our budget, it's our social programs, which account for over 40% of our spending and grow every year. That's the spending that needs to be curbed and made far more efficient.

And I'd prefer if we did away with parties completely.
#108179 to #108178 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I dunno about you, but I'm pretty sick and tired of constant meddling in foreign affairs. It's literal imperialism, all while we continue to proactively support and defend the existence of the world's worst human rights offenders.
Al-Qaeda and ISIS only exist to begin with because of completely deliberate decisions by US military intelligence. Let there be a power vacuum. It's not our problem until these backwards neanderthals somehow manage to make nukes.
"What's bankrupting us isn't our military, which is only 18% of our budget, it's our social programs, which account for over 40% of our spending and grow every year. That's the spending that needs to be curbed and made far more efficient."
Cutting spending is difficult because attempts to replace existing systems get hijacked into attempts to completely remove them, so all that is possible is to slowly add onto them while making the process of using the services increasingly convoluted and arbitrary for no other reason than to spite users, because that is what voters want. We've wasted insane amounts of money on drug testing users only for tests to largely come up negative.
#108181 to #108179 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
I agree with the imperialism, but that has mostly been within the Middle East. There are tons of places in the world where the US has bases that play greater roles. I have tons of instructors now who were deployed guarding temporary bases in Africa that were distributing aid and teaching the villagers better building techniques, maintaining solar panels, building water purifiers, etc. We have the potential to use our military power for good and help other nations that are struggling. Places like Japan, Korea, and Germany have done exceptionally well with the help of US forces being present to help rebuild infrastructure and for protection when they can't effectively do so on their own.

And that's primarily because government has a tendency to do nothing else but grow larger and become more and more inefficient and ineffective. Making a large government smaller is almost always done through it either collapsing or through a political coup. I agree that the drug testing is a waste of time and money though.
#108182 to #108181 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Does that kind of assistance even need much money, though? Most first world countries could probably afford it. Hell, the Brits have done overseas assistance with little issue and have military standards as high as ours, and they still have their (admittedly poor example of) UHC and welfare.

I do agree about growth of government, though. Too bad revolution in modern times is usually attempted by people with such insane views that their insane hubris is their motivation.
#108186 to #108182 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
No, if you've ever been through training you'd see first hand that money gets thrown around like nothing in a lot of ways. While being nonexistent in others. Most of our money gets sunk into R&D like with the F-35, which us what I have issue with.

And Great Britain has a FAR smaller force than us, even when scaled for population. We have 11 Carrier groups, if you've ever seen a carrier group, you'd understand how many ships and men that is. They're all essentially floating cities with the capability to take out small countries. Britain has zero.

And yeah, I think the unfortunate fact of the modern world is that a government will only go through substantial change after it spends itself to collapse.
#108197 to #108186 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Nah, I know how to use a gun but I admit I doubt I'd last a day in basic, lel. I know about the physical capability, which is why I suggested that consultancy in nations that don't know how to military their way out of getting invaded isn't like pouring obscene amounts of money into something so some industry jerk can take it.
"And yeah, I think the unfortunate fact of the modern world is that a government will only go through substantial change after it spends itself to collapse."
That's pretty much how it's always been.
#108153 to #108147 - akkere ONLINE
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
The "they've been right since 1975" loses quite a bit of value when you find out they've only predicted four times.
wiumpe.com/faqs/results/
The one that's kind of sketchy is the 1987 election; democrats correctly predicted Dukakis as the nominee, but Bob Dole as the successful nominee. Yet, despite this, somehow Bush won the general election(?).
#108155 to #108153 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
That's exactly my point. There's no fantastical source that determines every election. As I've said, the sources in this thread are borderline snakeoil, whether you agree with them or not.
#108154 to #108153 - akkere ONLINE
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
but Bob Dole as the successful Republican nominee*
#108148 to #108147 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Yeah I just found the same thing. That's a couple months old and said it doesn't predict electorates very well, and Hillary is creaming Bernie right now. Plus this poll comes from Illinois College students, Illinois is very democrat (i live there), and who does Bernie poll highest for? Liberal college age individuals.

Given the current situation, I'd say the one I posted is more likely to come to fruition, unless Bernie makes a hard comeback in the next week.
#108150 to #108148 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Although I have to say, a lot of Hillary's success is probably due to how obviously the Democrat establishment favours her.
#108151 to #108150 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Oh absolutely, if it weren't for the superdelegates, they'd be neck and neck.
#108149 to #108148 - feelythefeel
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
I'm not saying I disagree with you, I'm just saying that you can't put much stock in these fortuneteller-type sources. It's borderline snakeoil.
#108152 to #108149 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Yeah I'm taking it with a grain of salt, just was interesting.
#108142 to #108141 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
It does help that people tend to alternate between Democratic and Republican candidates.
#108145 to #108142 - marinepenguin
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
I've noticed that a lot of democrats will vote for Trump if their democrat candidate doesn't win the nomination. While most republicans would never consider voting democrat, they'll either stay home or vote trump, at least gauging from the comments I've seen and who I've talked to.
#108098 - asotil
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
>Claims to be against the Jewish Oligarchy in his books
>Constantly slandered by politicians even before entering politics because can't be bought
>South Carolina
>"I lost hundreds of friends on 9/11"
>Drops the truth bombs about 9/11, George Bush, etc.
>Talks about making America great again and taking it from the current controlling state it's under
>Completely self funded campaign
>Winning despite despite endless smear campaigns from left right and center
>Non-stop comparisons to Hitler, the KKK, and other hate groups
>Entire GOP turned against him, spun it around to make them fight among themselves and secure his lead

Are you starting to see the picture, /politics/?
It was never about the Presidency
It was all for Revenge
#108159 to #108098 - anon
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
Hes a Jew Himself.
#108121 to #108098 - Shiny
Reply +1
(02/27/2016) [-]
I do respect him a lot for the 9/11 honesty, even if I disagree about the root causes of it.
#108081 - thumbfortrump
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35581708

Crackdown on freedom of speech by new Polish government continues.
#108062 - shekelnator
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
i support confederates now
#108163 to #108062 - anon
Reply 0
(02/28/2016) [-]
It the flag of Novorossia you retard.
#108218 to #108163 - duudegladiator
Reply +1
(02/28/2016) [-]
No such thing.
#108075 to #108062 - unforgivensoul
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Rebel Son  Southern Wind Mr Confederate Man  Rebel Son with lyrics You may like this sandman.
#108044 - Sunset ONLINE
Reply +1
(02/27/2016) [-]
MARCO RUBIO FUCKED A GAY PORN STAR IN 1989 AFTER HE GOT DONE SUCKING AND FUCKING HIS WAY OUT OF A GAY FOAM PARTY
#108013 - shekelnator
Reply +3
(02/27/2016) [-]
what do you guys think of Turkish gov?
#108020 to #108013 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
It's not ethnic persecution and funding terrorism when they do it, apparently.

#108030 to #108020 - shekelnator
Reply +1
(02/27/2016) [-]
uh huh
#108034 to #108030 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Denying genocides is sick, but par for the course; what really irritates me about them is their current persecution of Kurds.
#108041 to #108034 - shekelnator
Reply +1
(02/27/2016) [-]
turks are fine. but their Gov is shit. it is slowly killing itself. they even allowed ISIS today to cross the borders and attack syria in kurdish held area.
#108045 to #108041 - Shiny
Reply 0
(02/27/2016) [-]
Turkey does a lot to endorse and enable terrorism, even though they say otherwise. They like ISIS, they don't just tolerate their existence as a means to an end, likely because most of ISIS is Arab, aka not Kurdish.

They are also openly hostile to based as fuck Rojava and have gone out of their way to attack them directly.